HISTORY REPEATEDLY REMINDS US THAT IT TAKES MORE THAN AN IMPRESSIVE RESUME TO MAKE A GOOD PRESIDENT

Does Hillary's résumé make her the 'best-qualified' candidate?

IS HILLARY CLINTON qualified to be president? To hear some of her prominent supporters tell it, no candidate could be more qualified.
Stumping in Iowa with Clinton on Sunday, Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey hailed her
as a "great American" who would be "the most qualified person since
George Washington" to serve as president. Mere hyperbole from an
enthusiastic advocate? Maybe. Yet James Carville, the well-known
political advisor, had made the same claim one day earlier.

James Buchanan, the 15th president of the United States, had one of the most imposing résumés in American political history.

"We've got the best chance we've ever had to put a woman in the White
House," Carville wrote in a fundraising email, "and oh, by the way, she
just happens to be the most qualified candidate maybe since General
George Washington himself!!"
Many Clinton admirers talk this way. Last spring, political scientist (and Bloomberg columnist) Jonathan Bernstein proclaimed her "probably the best qualified presidential candidate ever." The New York Times, endorsing Clinton last week, placed her among "the most broadly and deeply qualified presidential candidates in modern history."
Those who rave like this about Clinton's qualifications are generally
talking about her résumé: eight years as First Lady, eight more as
senator from New York, four years as secretary of state. Earlier, she
was a partner in the Rose Law Firm and head of the Legal Services
Corporation. It all makes for an impressive CV, arguably the most
impressive of the current presidential contenders. But does it really
make for "the best qualified presidential candidate ever"? Or even the
best qualified in 2016?
If imposing résumés augured presidential greatness, James Buchanan would be on Mount Rushmore. Prior to becoming the 15th
president of the United States, Buchanan was a member of the
Pennsylvania legislature, was elected five times to the US House of
Representatives, and served as ambassador to Russia. He went back to
Congress after his diplomatic tour in St. Petersburg, spending 10 years
as senator from Pennsylvania — a post he resigned in 1845 to become
secretary of state. He was offered a seat on the Supreme Court, which he
declined, but later returned to diplomacy as America's ambassador to
Great Britain.
When Buchanan was elected president in 1856, it doubtless seemed to
many that a candidate with such glittering political credentials was
destined for brilliance in the White House. But Buchanan failed
miserably as president. He was hesitant to lead, paralyzed by the
secession crisis, and unwilling to hear dissenting viewpoints. Moreover,
as presidential historian Alvin Felzenberg
writes, Buchanan was a cynical operator who "betrayed a cavalier
attitude toward ethics, both public and private, and seemed to believe
that most everyone else did as well." By the time he left office, the
nation was on the brink of civil war.
Buchanan was succeeded by the president Hillary Clinton says she finds most inspiring: Abraham Lincoln. One of the most heroic figures in American history, President Lincoln was also, in conventional terms,one of the least qualified.
A single term in Congress, an unremarkable stint in the Illinois
legislature, a failed Senate campaign — nobody could have called
Lincoln's pre-presidential career a dazzling political success. Yet it
was he who preserved the Union, ended slavery, and saved the "last, best
hope of earth."
A list of offices held is a flimsy guide to the quality of a
presidential candidate. Integrity, vision, humility, consistency of
purpose, a willingness to learn — those are far more reliable indicators
of excellence in a potential president. Clinton has a fine résumé. But
history repeatedly reminds us that it takes more than that to make a
fine president.
(Jeff Jacoby is a columnist for The Boston Globe).

Post a Comment

Translate This Blog

Followers

Subscribe To

Search This Blog

About Me

A Texan who loves the truth and hates the lying, cheating, and deliberate prevarication that characterizes so much of our civic discourse these days.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
RIPOSTE, n. 1. Fencing: a quick thrust after parrying a lunge 2. a quick sharp return in speech or action; counterstroke.
- The Random House Dictionary of the English Language...........
You can contact me by sending an email to me at: leorugiens23@gmail.com